Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
This Is Kirk!
Jeopardy! Champion
Posts: 5002
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:35 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by This Is Kirk! »

BobF wrote:
tjorcutt wrote:My knowledge of the Bourbons ends after Louis xvi, I thought that line ended after the beheading, so I went with napoleon even just because I didn't have a better guess
Welcome to JBoard! I would have pretty much done the same thing, guessed Napoleon with no confidence in the answer simply because I knew he reigned in the 19th and it was interrupted. Even though I kept thinking "he was an emperor not a monarch, does that fit?"
Monarch: a sovereign head of state, especially a king, queen, or emperor.

So it does fit. Unfortunately it's wrong. :)

User avatar
CailinGaoilge
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 8:36 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada; formerly resident in UK and Ireland

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by CailinGaoilge »

Tony, you and Susan played a great game, especially during DJ - I really thought Harris would be out to one or the other of you. Tough luck on FJ.

Almost instaget for me - I knew that Louis XVI's son was never crowned but is considered to be Louis XVII, so the 100-day king was Louis XVIII. Sounds like I need to read The Count of Monte Cristo.

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1833
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Golf »

alietr wrote:On these proposed DD wagers you are dismissing the significant psychological aspect of missing the DD and losing your lead. It's not worth it for most people.
Psychology has absolutely nothing to do with making a strategically correct wager. To steal a quote from "Searching for Bobby Fischer", most contestants don't play to win. They play not to lose. And many a time it costs them the game and tons of cold hard cash.
You're also not taking into account how quickly the game moves when you're actually on it. Are there people who can do these sorts of calculations on the fly? Absolutely. Is that all contestants or even a significant percentage of them? Absolutely not.
If a contestant has prepared properly and knows proper game play, the vast majority of the time the calculations are cake. But as we know, most contestants don't know the first thing about how to properly play the game. Therefore they have no knowledge to draw from and naturally freeze up when finding a DD and blurt out $2000 or some other senseless round number.

The better prepared a contestant is, the slower the game moves. And vice versa. No different than a star athlete in the middle of crunch time.

Clue Jungry
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 214
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:30 am

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Clue Jungry »

Golf -- I was just curious whether you've ever appeared on Jeopardy! or any other game show. Your discussions about optimal betting may be mathematically accurate. But I think it's unreasonable to expect even the most prepared contestant to always make the proper DD wagering decision. The pressure of the game and the attendant cognitive load can make any Jeopardy contestant play worse (i.e., miss gettable clues and make illogical decisions) than they might while sitting at home on the couch. I take no issue with analyzing Jeopardy wagering; in fact, I enjoy it as much as many other Boardies. Perhaps, though, it might be better to focus on the balance between the theoretical and the practical.

User avatar
tjorcutt
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 12:36 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by tjorcutt »

Clue Jungry wrote:Golf -- I was just curious whether you've ever appeared on Jeopardy! or any other game show. Your discussions about optimal betting may be mathematically accurate. But I think it's unreasonable to expect even the most prepared contestant to always make the proper DD wagering decision. The pressure of the game and the attendant cognitive load can make any Jeopardy contestant play worse (i.e., miss gettable clues and make illogical decisions) than they might while sitting at home on the couch. I take no issue with analyzing Jeopardy wagering; in fact, I enjoy it as much as many other Boardies. Perhaps, though, it might be better to focus on the balance between the theoretical and the practical.
I'd agree with this. I'm in the same boat watching the game at home, but the pace of the game feels so different when the lights are shining and Alex Trebek is standing 20 feet away. The hardest part with Jeopardy prep is recreating that same environment and pressure of being on stage. I studied lots on wagering and strategy, but honestly, a lot of that goes out the window when the clues are being read. Some people are definitely better at it than others, but I think the psychological aspect is one of the hardest aspects for contestants; I know there were a few questions I would have gotten at home that I blanked on.

Golf
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1833
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:27 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Golf »

Clue Jungry wrote:Golf -- I was just curious whether you've ever appeared on Jeopardy! or any other game show. Your discussions about optimal betting may be mathematically accurate. But I think it's unreasonable to expect even the most prepared contestant to always make the proper DD wagering decision. The pressure of the game and the attendant cognitive load can make any Jeopardy contestant play worse (i.e., miss gettable clues and make illogical decisions) than they might while sitting at home on the couch. I take no issue with analyzing Jeopardy wagering; in fact, I enjoy it as much as many other Boardies. Perhaps, though, it might be better to focus on the balance between the theoretical and the practical.
WWTBAM with Regis. Also competed in and won various trivia endeavors with prizes upwards of $40k on the line. I've been there many times. A good deal of my success I attribute to massive preparation. That's why I tend to emphasize such and realize when contestants are simply not prepared. With so much on the line, it's both sad and frustrating to me when contestants just throw away a once in a lifetime opportunity.

As I've said many times, I can totally understand blanking on a clue or having a bad answer slip out. That happens whether on the couch or under the lights. But not knowing how to play the game is a different matter entirely.
Last edited by Golf on Tue Jun 28, 2016 12:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

sumithar
Contributor
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 8:14 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by sumithar »

BigDaddyMatty wrote:Coryat: $31,000
43 R/3 W
DD: 3/3
FJ: Nope
LT: veil, ethylene

A well-played game by all involved.
TenPoundHammer wrote:There's a Seth in the Bible?
In fairness, you have to read all the way to Genesis 5 to learn about him.
TenPoundHammer wrote:Pretty sure the pepper compound is capsaicin, not capsicum as the closed captioning said.
Unfortunately, the captioner and I made the same mistake. I know that capsicum is the genus of the peppers and capsaicin is the compound that makes them spicy, but that didn't stop me from blowing $3200 of Karl Coryat's money.

Capsicum is what we call bell peppers in India. In Tamil it is called koda mulagai, literally umbrella pepper. What Americans call peppers are generally called chillies (that's how the plural is spelt).

User avatar
triviawayne
Hoping I don’t drown in this contestant pool
Posts: 1908
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by triviawayne »

Golf wrote:
Clue Jungry wrote:Golf -- I was just curious whether you've ever appeared on Jeopardy! or any other game show. Your discussions about optimal betting may be mathematically accurate. But I think it's unreasonable to expect even the most prepared contestant to always make the proper DD wagering decision. The pressure of the game and the attendant cognitive load can make any Jeopardy contestant play worse (i.e., miss gettable clues and make illogical decisions) than they might while sitting at home on the couch. I take no issue with analyzing Jeopardy wagering; in fact, I enjoy it as much as many other Boardies. Perhaps, though, it might be better to focus on the balance between the theoretical and the practical.
WWTBAM with Regis. Also competed in and won various trivia endeavors with prizes upwards of $40k on the line. I've been there many times. A good deal of my success I attribute to massive preparation. That's why I tend to emphasize such and realize when contestants are simply not prepared. With so much on the line, it's both sad and frustrating to me when contestants just throw away a once in a lifetime opportunity.

As I've said many times, I can totally understand blanking on a clue or having a bad answer slip out. That happens whether on the couch or under the lights. But not knowing how to play the game is a different matter entirely.
Then you should know that part of the preparation involves knowing your limitations. Playing the part of a human calculator each and every betting opportunity is not necessarily optimum strategy for every person in every situation.

Just because someone makes a bet that doesn't fit your narrow box and calculations doesn't make it wrong for that person at that time.
Total game show career losings = $171,522

User avatar
whoisalexjacob
2015 TOC'er
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:19 am

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by whoisalexjacob »

IronNeck wrote: 5. However, I then said, "Don't worry, he probably covered an all-in third place bet".

But then I realized he had instead covered the less likely scenario. That of an all-in second place bet. And was thus short a few hundred dollars. I said a much longer string of profanity as my mother laughed and shook her head.
Wha...? You mean he made the completely standard cover bet from the lead?

IronNeck wrote: $400 is not "meaningless" per se, but meaningless in that particular situation. (Getting the DD wrong) In fact, the $400 and then the further $1400 ($1800 total) Tony lost out on with the second DD wager mistake turned out be very significant indeed, costing him the game. (He lost by $301)

In my opinion, it's more correct to say that he lost by $4601, the amount he was short of a lock game. If he had an extra $400, it's not unreasonable to assume that Harris would have adjusted his wager to still end up with a win. (Sure, Harris' wager could have been a random number, but when we're talking hypotheticals, I don't know if you can assume a bad FJ wager by your opponent.)

IronNeck wrote: Also, as noted, Tony should have bet the difference between him and second place or more both times. I'm not saying $2k was optimal. Only that it's the smallest value which is defensible under a reasonable set of assumptions.
Based on what? This strikes me as arbitrary. A $5 wager is certainly defensible on both daily doubles. If it's your personal philosophy to always bet at least the amount you're leading by, fine, but there's no math that says that it's mandatory to do so.

User avatar
whoisalexjacob
2015 TOC'er
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:19 am

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by whoisalexjacob »

Clue Jungry wrote:Golf -- I was just curious whether you've ever appeared on Jeopardy! or any other game show. Your discussions about optimal betting may be mathematically accurate. But I think it's unreasonable to expect even the most prepared contestant to always make the proper DD wagering decision. The pressure of the game and the attendant cognitive load can make any Jeopardy contestant play worse (i.e., miss gettable clues and make illogical decisions) than they might while sitting at home on the couch. I take no issue with analyzing Jeopardy wagering; in fact, I enjoy it as much as many other Boardies. Perhaps, though, it might be better to focus on the balance between the theoretical and the practical.

I understand you're just trying to be a nice guy with this post, but do you honestly think you are making a point that hasn't been made hundreds of times on this board? Yes, all the players are under pressure. They are all nervous. We all know this and accept this. Let's stop repeating it over and over again... or, let's just stop analyzing contestants' play altogether and everyone can just post all the triple-stumpers they got. That would be fun to read.

Personally, while acknowledging that he can come off as combative, I appreciate a poster like Golf who by and large seems to know what he's talking about when he's criticizing players. Better than someone getting uppity and condescending while they make incorrect statements about wagering strategy.

Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 9928
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Bamaman »

teapot37 wrote:
TenPoundHammer wrote: I didn't recognize the Edict of Milan, but it sounded like it had something to do with Christianity (it's actually when Roman emperor Constantine 'legitimized' Christianity in AD 313). That makes it AD too. (The city of Milan only dates back to about 300 BC.)
I wish he had founded the world's first university while he was there.

British kings and queens is a good subject of study if you get the call. Knowing the order they served and a general idea of the time frame can help you a lot.

French kings not so much. Maybe search the archive to see what pops up, but they don't come up that often and learning all of them would be a big waste of time. Louis XIV=Sun King is probably the biggest factoid to know.

That being said, I did try to precall the FJ and started thinking about him. I knew his great-grandson (Louis XV) was next, taking over at the ripe old age of five. After him came Louis XVI. Then after he and his wife lost their heads the crown went to his young son (in name only) for a few years until he died in prison when he was about ten. I really wasn't sure what the timeline was for the Bourbons coming back and when Napoleon was in charge but I knew the next Bourbon king was Louis XVIII.

So I started with L18. I did consider Napoleon, thinking his 100 days might have been his exile. but while I know he declared himself an emperor, I really don't think of him as a monarch. He did not inherit the throne and nobody inherited it from him. So I stuck with the right guy.

IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by IronNeck »

Firstly, let me say I'm a huge fan of yours Alex, from everything to your preparation to your performance on the show. A true inspiration.
omgwheelhouse wrote:
IronNeck wrote: 5. However, I then said, "Don't worry, he probably covered an all-in third place bet".

But then I realized he had instead covered the less likely scenario. That of an all-in second place bet. And was thus short a few hundred dollars. I said a much longer string of profanity as my mother laughed and shook her head.
Wha...? You mean he made the completely standard cover bet from the lead?
I'm just relating my reactions as they happened. I thought the all-in from second would be unlikely given the 3rd place score.
omgwheelhouse wrote: In my opinion, it's more correct to say that he lost by $4601, the amount he was short of a lock game. If he had an extra $400, it's not unreasonable to assume that Harris would have adjusted his wager to still end up with a win. (Sure, Harris' wager could have been a random number, but when we're talking hypotheticals, I don't know if you can assume a bad FJ wager by your opponent.)
Okay, fair point. Regardless, I'm sure you would agree the 2 DD wagers in the DJ round were poor by any reasonable set of assumptions, no?
omgwheelhouse wrote:
IronNeck wrote: Also, as noted, Tony should have bet the difference between him and second place or more both times. I'm not saying $2k was optimal. Only that it's the smallest value which is defensible under a reasonable set of assumptions.
Based on what? This strikes me as arbitrary. A $5 wager is certainly defensible on both daily doubles. If it's your personal philosophy to always bet at least the amount you're leading by, fine, but there's no math that says that it's mandatory to do so.
Here, I have to disagree. Or I think you misunderstood what I wrote.

A $5 wager on a short word category DD or an $800 literature clue DJ board? I doubt a contestant with less than at least a 60% (possibly 70%) rate on either makes it on the show. (And based on Tony's play, I would argue he was better than average in terms of knowledge)

I agree the $5 wager makes sense and is underused, but not on those 2 DDs. It's not a "philosophy" for me to bet any amount; I'm a mathematician by education. I would have made the literature clue a true DD, personally. However, I don't see any reasoning for betting less than the lead in either case.

Is there some scenario you have in mind?

User avatar
MitchO
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 903
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 10:19 am

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by MitchO »

The band Pearl Jam was previously named "Mookie Blaylock". Eddie has a big time basketball obsession.

Anachronism
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:45 am

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by Anachronism »

CrunchyTaco wrote:Looks like Jeopardy! is going to be preempted in the Detroit area so we can watch the Ford Fireworks Countdown Special! I really hate the Detroit NBC affiliate :evil: :evil: :evil:
WDIV's programming department must be run by someone who absolutely hates Jeopardy! They don't even give proper information to the cable companies, so the guides often claim that the 12:30 pm repeats are original episodes. This plays havoc with DVRs. And they often run their graphics about which Kardashian is next going to appear on some talk show right over the player introductions.

I have no idea what comprises a countdown to fireworks, but I didn't find out.

It's too bad. There was a time when WDIV was one of the best local stations around. Top-notch news department. Mort Crim was actually a decent anchor, though (trivia alert) his reaction to a female co-anchor (Jessica Savitch) in the '70s when they were working in Philadelphia was the inspiration for the Anchorman movies. Today, WDIV is a shadow of what it was.

User avatar
CrunchyTaco
Swimming in the Jeopardy! Pool
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by CrunchyTaco »

About four years ago, they (WDIV) cut the think music down to a couple of seconds, edited out all of the contestant interviews, and edited out any pause in a stand and stare. I'm not sure why they did it, but I think it was to fit in more commercials. Thankfully, this only lasted a couple of weeks.

bpmod
Rank
Posts: 5424
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:26 pm
Location: Hamilton Ontario

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by bpmod »

CrunchyTaco wrote:About four years ago, they (WDIV) cut the think music down to a couple of seconds, edited out all of the contestant interviews, and edited out any pause in a stand and stare. I'm not sure why they did it, but I think it was to fit in more commercials. Thankfully, this only lasted a couple of weeks.
Holy Crap!!

I was told by one person at WIVB (CBS, Buffalo NY) that, according to their agreement, they are not even allowed to run a scroll across the screen (but they do anyway). He didn't say what the penalty for doing so might be.

Preempting the show entirely, on the other hand, seems to be perfectly fine.

Brian
...but the senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity.

If I had 50 cents for every math question I got right, I'd have $6.30 by now.

User avatar
TenPoundHammer
Otters are meant to swim
Posts: 8345
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by TenPoundHammer »

WNEM once pre-empted both J! and Wheel THREE TIMES in one week for Time-Life infomercials.

They also do a "winter weather road show" every December that knocks out both shows. In the past, they've done specials on local hospitals that ate up that hour.

My favorite, though, was about 8 years ago, when the weatherman interrupted Wheel for about 10 minutes to say "as you can see, there is clearly absolutely jack squat on our radar. There could not be less chance of a tornado than there is now. But since some guy in Owosso called up to say he spotted one, we'll keep yammering on about tornado safety because WEATHER." And this was back when their chief meteorologist (<Bill Engvall>apparently they travel in tribes</Bill Engvall>) was a hulking blob of lard who couldn't make it through a single sentence without saying "uh" 14 times. I noticed that they got a LOT less Chicken Little-y once he finally retired, though they still do that damn winter weather show. Because apparently Michigan has never had winter before, so people need to know such important facts as "winter in a northern state can be cold, so wear a jacket".
Ten Pound Hammer

This space for rent

bpmod
Rank
Posts: 5424
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:26 pm
Location: Hamilton Ontario

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by bpmod »

TenPoundHammer wrote:... who couldn't make it through a single sentence without saying "uh" 14 times.
Maybe he should run for Prime Minister of Canada. That is if he has nice hair.

Brian
...but the senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity.

If I had 50 cents for every math question I got right, I'd have $6.30 by now.

User avatar
triviawayne
Hoping I don’t drown in this contestant pool
Posts: 1908
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by triviawayne »

You could always be stuck with WPVI. They love to cut off the beginning of Jeopardy all the time or simply not show it until 230 the next morning without warning.

The "news" they find so important? Weather update telling us nothing more than they told us 40 minutes ago, every--yes EVERY election even though polls are still open gets top priority over a top rated show that's on year round, someone finds a penny heads up is considered breaking news in Philadelphia if it will inturrupt a game show.

Not to mention every day they break FCC rules and plaster lottery results during the first half of the first round of the show, hiding parts of the clues because their crunch isn't set properly. WPVI used to air the lottery drawing at 7pm and at 701pm start Jeopardy...but if there was "news", it would come on...wait for it...yes that's right...AFTER the lottery drawing!
Total game show career losings = $171,522

User avatar
whoisalexjacob
2015 TOC'er
Posts: 561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:19 am

Re: Monday, June 27, 2016 Game Recap & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Post by whoisalexjacob »

IronNeck wrote:Firstly, let me say I'm a huge fan of yours Alex, from everything to your preparation to your performance on the show. A true inspiration.
omgwheelhouse wrote:
IronNeck wrote: 5. However, I then said, "Don't worry, he probably covered an all-in third place bet".

But then I realized he had instead covered the less likely scenario. That of an all-in second place bet. And was thus short a few hundred dollars. I said a much longer string of profanity as my mother laughed and shook her head.
Wha...? You mean he made the completely standard cover bet from the lead?
I'm just relating my reactions as they happened. I thought the all-in from second would be unlikely given the 3rd place score.
omgwheelhouse wrote: In my opinion, it's more correct to say that he lost by $4601, the amount he was short of a lock game. If he had an extra $400, it's not unreasonable to assume that Harris would have adjusted his wager to still end up with a win. (Sure, Harris' wager could have been a random number, but when we're talking hypotheticals, I don't know if you can assume a bad FJ wager by your opponent.)
Okay, fair point. Regardless, I'm sure you would agree the 2 DD wagers in the DJ round were poor by any reasonable set of assumptions, no?
omgwheelhouse wrote:
IronNeck wrote: Also, as noted, Tony should have bet the difference between him and second place or more both times. I'm not saying $2k was optimal. Only that it's the smallest value which is defensible under a reasonable set of assumptions.
Based on what? This strikes me as arbitrary. A $5 wager is certainly defensible on both daily doubles. If it's your personal philosophy to always bet at least the amount you're leading by, fine, but there's no math that says that it's mandatory to do so.
Here, I have to disagree. Or I think you misunderstood what I wrote.

A $5 wager on a short word category DD or an $800 literature clue DJ board? I doubt a contestant with less than at least a 60% (possibly 70%) rate on either makes it on the show. (And based on Tony's play, I would argue he was better than average in terms of knowledge)

I agree the $5 wager makes sense and is underused, but not on those 2 DDs. It's not a "philosophy" for me to bet any amount; I'm a mathematician by education. I would have made the literature clue a true DD, personally. However, I don't see any reasoning for betting less than the lead in either case.

Is there some scenario you have in mind?
Well thanks bud, appreciate it. The consensus strategy from the lead is to bet enough to guarantee a win if you're right, so I was surprised that you would mock the contestant for doing what 99% of us would do.

Saying something is not defensible is strong language. There are situations where that kind of language is called for, but in my opinion, those daily double wagers did not fall into that category. I don't have a problem with you disliking the wagers but I don't think it's correct to say that they were indefensible.

Post Reply